杀戮时刻
选择播放线路
7.0 |03月16日 02:19 |HD中字
简介:

  黑人工人卡尔(塞缪尔•杰克逊 Samuel L. Jackson 饰)十岁的女儿被两个白人蹂躏了,在那种族歧视盛行的岁月,卡尔不相信法律能帮他和女儿讨回公道。于是,他径自找到了那个家伙并将他们射杀。复仇后的卡尔直接来到了警察局投案自首。
  年轻律师杰克(马修•麦康纳 Matthew McConaughey  饰)被指派为卡尔的辩护律师,由于卡尔根本不相信法律会对黑人公正,所以他和杰克没有达成一致。果然,庭上卡尔收到了不公正的对待。法律系那大学生艾伦(桑德拉•布洛克 Sandra Bullock  饰)这时出现了,她站在杰克这一边,决定为卡尔做无罪辩护。
  虽然杰克获得了支持,但他的生活却受到了极大的威胁:当地的三K党用尽各种方法要挟杰克,甚至威胁要炸毁他的房子!卡尔看到了杰克和其他人的努力,他决定和众人团结一致,为公义而战。

猜你喜欢
换一换
1
8.0
HD中字
关于在短时间内的某几个人的经过
8.0
上映时间:03月16日 01:26
主演:未知
简介:

  Voice 1 (male "professional announcer" type): This neighborhood(1) was made for the wretched dignity of the petty bourgeoisie, for respectable occupations and intellectual tourism. The sedentary population of the upper floors was sheltered from the influences of the street. This neighborhood has remained the same. It was the strange setting of our story, where a systematic questioning of all the diversions and works of a society, a total critique of its idea of happiness, was expressed in acts.
  These people also scorned "subjective profundity". They were interested in nothing but an adequate and concrete expression of themselves.
  Voice 2 (Debord, monotone): Human beings are not fully conscious of their real life - usually groping in the dark; overwhelmed by the consequences of their acts; at every moment groups and individuals find themselves confronted with results they have not wished.
  Voice 1: They said that oblivion was their ruling passion. They wanted to reinvent everything each day; to become the masters and possessors of their own lives.
  Just as one does not judge a man according to the conception he has of himself, one cannot judge such periods of transition according to their own consciousness; on the contrary, one must explain the consciousness through the contradictions of material life, through the conflict between social conditions and the forces of social production.
  The progress achieved in the domination of nature was not yet matched by a corresponding liberation of everyday life. Youth passed away among the various controls of resignation.
  Our camera has captured for you a few aspects of a provisional microsociety.
  The knowledge of empirical facts remains abstract and superficial as long as it is not concretized by its integration into the whole "” which alone permits the supersession of partial and abstract problems so as to arrive at their concrete essence, and implicitly at their meaning.
  This group was on the margins of the economy. It tended toward a role of pure consumption, and first of all the free consumption of its time. It thus found itself directly engaged in qualitative variations of everyday life but deprived of any means to intervene in them.
  The group ranged over a very small area. The same times brought them back to the same places. No one went to bed early. Discussion on the meaning of all this continued...
  Voice 2: "Our life is a journey "” In the winter and the night. "” We seek our passage..."�
  Voice 1: The abandoned literature nevertheless exerted a delaying action on new affective formulations.
  Voice 2: There was the fatigue and the cold of the morning in this much-traversed labyrinth, like an enigma that we had to resolve. It was a looking-glass reality through which we had to discover the potential richness of reality.
  On the bank of the river evening began once again; and caresses; and the importance of a world without importance. Just as the eyes have a blurred vision of many things and can see only one clearly, so the will can strive only incompletely toward diverse objects and can completely love only one at a time.
  Voice 3 (young girl): No one counted on the future. It would never be possible to be together later, or anywhere else. There would never be a greater freedom.
  Voice 1: The refusal of time and of growing old automatically limited encounters in this narrow, contingent zone, where what was lacking was felt as irreparable. The extreme precariousness of the means of getting by without working was at the root of this impatience which made excesses necessary and breaks definitive.
  Voice 2: One never really contests an organization of existence without contesting all of that organization's forms of language.
  Voice 1: When freedom is practiced in a closed circle, it fades into a dream, becomes a mere representation of itself. The ambiance of play is by nature unstable. At any moment "ordinary life"� can prevail once again. The geographical limitation of play is even more striking than its temporal limitation. Any game takes place within the contours of its spatial domain. Around the neighborhood, around its fleeting and threatened immobility, stretched a half-known city where people met only by chance, losing their way forever.
  The girls who found their way there, because they were legally under the control of their families until the age of eighteen, were often recaptured by the defenders of that detestable institution. They were generally confined under the guard of those creatures who among all the bad products of a bad society are the most ugly and repugnant: nuns.
  What usually makes documentaries so easy to understand is the arbitrary limitation of their subject matter. They describe the atomization of social functions and the isolation of their products. One can, in contrast, envisage the entire complexity of a moment which is not resolved into a work, a moment whose movement indissolubly contains facts and values and whose meaning does not yet appear. The subject matter of the documentary would then be this confused totality.
  Voice 2: The era had arrived at a level of knowledge and technical means that made possible, and increasingly necessary, a direct construction of all aspects of a liberated affective and practical existence. The appearance of these superior means of action, still unused because of the delays in the project of liquidating the commodity economy, had already condemned aesthetic activity, whose ambitions and powers were both outdated. The decay of art and of all the values of former mores had formed our sociological background. The ruling class's monopoly over the instruments we needed to control in order to realize the collective art of our time had excluded us from a cultural production officially devoted to illustrating and repeating the past. An art film on this generation can only be a film on its absence of real creations.
  Everyone unthinkingly followed the paths learned once and for all, to their work and their home, to their predictable future. For them duty had already become a habit, and habit a duty. They did not see the deficiency of their city. They thought the deficiency of their life was natural. We wanted to break out of this conditioning, in quest of another use of the urban landscape, in quest of new passions. The atmosphere of a few places gave us intimations of the future powers of an architecture it would be necessary to create to be the support and framework for less mediocre games. We could expect nothing of anything we had not ourselves altered. The urban environment proclaimed the orders and tastes of the ruling society just as violently as the newspapers. It is man who makes the unity of the world, but man has extended himself everywhere. People can see nothing around them that is not their own image; everything speaks to them of themselves. Their very landscape is alive. There were obstacles everywhere. There was a cohesion in the obstacles of all types. They maintained the coherent reign of poverty. Everything being connected, it was necessary to change everything by a unitary struggle, or nothing. It was necessary to link up with the masses, but we were surrounded by sleep.
  Voice 3: The dictatorship of the proletariat is a desperate struggle, bloody and bloodless, violent and peaceful, military and economic, educational and administrative, against the forces and traditions of the old world.
  Voice 1: In this country it is once again the men of order who have rebelled. They have reinforced their power. They have been able to aggravate the grotesqueness of the ruling conditions according to their will. They have embellished their system with the funereal ceremonies of the past.
  Voice 2: Years, like a single instant prolonged to this point, come to an end.
  Voice 1: What was directly lived reappears frozen in the distance, fit into the tastes and illusions of an era, carried away with it.
  Voice 2: The appearance of events that we have not made, that others have made against us, now obliges us to be aware of the passage of time, its results, the transformation of our own desires into events. What differentiates the past from the present is precisely its out-of-reach objectivity; there is no more should-be; being is so consumed that it has ceased to exist. The details are already lost in the dust of time. Who was afraid of life, afraid of the night, afraid of being taken, afraid of being kept?
  Voice 3: What should be abolished continues, and we continue to wear away with it. We are engulfed. We are separated. The years pass and we haven't changed anything.
  Voice 2: Once again morning in the same streets. Once again the fatigue of so many similarly passed nights. It is a walk that has lasted a long time.
  Voice 1: Really hard to drink more.
  Voice 2: Of course one might make a film of it. But even if such a film succeeds in being as fundamentally disconnected and unsatisfying as the reality it deals with, it will never be more than a re-creation "” poor and false like this botched traveling shot.
  Voice 3: There are now people who pride themselves on being authors of films, as others were authors of novels. They are even more backward than the novelists because they are unaware of the decomposition and exhaustion of individual expression in our time, ignorant of the end of the arts of passivity. They are praised for their sincerity since they dramatize, with more personal depth, the conventions of which their life consists. There is talk of the liberation of the cinema. But what does it matter to us if one more art is liberated through which Tom, Dick or Harry can joyously express their slavish sentiments? The only interesting venture is the liberation of everyday life, not only in the perspectives of history but for us and right away. This entails the withering away of alienated forms of communication. The cinema, too, has to be destroyed.
  Voice 2: In the final analysis, stars are created by the need we have for them, and not by their talent or lack of talent or even by the film industry or advertising. Miserable need, dismal, anonymous life that would like to expand itself to the dimensions of cinema life. The imaginary life on the screen is the product of this real need. The star is the projection of this need.
  The images of the advertisements during the intermissions are more suited than any others for evoking an intermission of life.
  To really describe this era it would no doubt be necessary to show many other things. But what would be the point?
  Better to grasp the totality of what has been done and what remains to be done than to add more ruins to the old world of the spectacle and of memories.
  1. This film, which evokes the lettrist experiences at the origin of the situationist movement, opens with shots of the Paris district frequented by the lettrists in the early 1950s.

1
HD中字
关于在短时间内的某几个人的经过
主演:
1
10.0
HD中字
选票风波
10.0
上映时间:03月16日 01:22
主演:凯文·史派西,劳拉·邓恩,鲍勃·巴拉班,小艾德·博格里,约翰·赫特,丹尼斯·利瑞,布鲁斯·麦克吉尔,汤姆·威尔金森,布鲁斯·奥尔特曼
简介:

  HBO电影频道投拍新片《选票风波》(Recount),回顾了2000年美国总统大选阶段闹得天翻地覆的佛州计票风波。
  影片剧本由曾出演《奔腾年代》和《欢乐谷》的演员丹尼·斯特朗创作,故事从选举日当天发生的事说起,讲到五周后佛罗里达州最高法院做出裁决,回顾发生在佛州的这场计票风波。据HBO高层表示,影片的重点将落在渗透于新闻事件中的“人性”上。《选票风波》定于08年春季美国总统大选高潮期在HBO电视台播出。HBO电影频道高层科林·卡伦德表示,除了政客、投票人等,影片还将聚焦那场事件中的很多小人物,“男人、女人、丈夫、妻子……所有那些不由自主卷入那场事件的人。”
  反映美国2000年大选内幕的电视电影《Recount》主演名单日前公布,凭《美国丽人》一夺奥斯卡影帝的凯文·斯派西将在片中扮演副总统戈尔的幕僚,《皇牌大间谍》导演则接任西德尼·波拉克执导此片。
  凯文斯派西曾一度被“小金人后反应”困扰,像哈利·贝瑞一样,这位表演技艺稳健,擅长驾御各种性格人物的演技派在得奖后就一直没接过配得上影帝称号的好角色,《Recount》一片让人看到他翻身的曙光,斯派西在片中将扮演戈尔总统的副参谋长荣·克莱因(Ron Klain),他也是协助戈尔针对当年投票结果对佛罗里达州征服提出诉讼的法律顾问。
  2000年大选是美国历史上最有争议的大选。虽然民主党候选人阿尔·戈尔在普选中领先,但是计票结果却显示共和党人乔治·沃克·布什以微弱优势获得了选举人票的多数。民主党对佛罗里达州的计票工作提出质疑,要求对有争议的选票重新计数。最后,美国最高法院判定布什赢得佛州选举,从而也赢得了大选。
  大选结束后不久,著名导演西德尼·波拉克应美国HBO有线电视公司邀请,着手拍摄一部描述这场选举的影片。但前不久老导演以病痛为由辞去导演一职,现在由拍过《皇牌大间谍》的杰伊·罗奇接手。加盟主演阵容的还有怪才导演大卫·林奇的御用女主角劳拉·邓恩,她扮演的凯瑟琳·哈里斯(Katherine Harris)时任佛罗里达州州务卿,就是她运用手中权利为布什在争议中争得胜利。老演员约翰·赫特将扮演美国前国务卿沃伦·克里斯托弗(Warren Christopher)。
  “怎么叫做政治家?政治家就是找有钱的人要钱,找穷人要选票。就是让有钱人和穷人都相信自己会维护他们的利益。”——美国一位幽默大师如是说。
  "Recount, recount, recount......", "Too close to call, too close to call,......"
  2000年12月13日晚上8时,民主党总统候选人戈尔在华盛顿的副总统官邸发表输诚演说,美国历史上持续事件最长的总统大选在一连串的重新计票声中,以极具争议的数百票之差落下了帷幕。一些时事评论家认为,克林顿总统抢走了一个古巴小男孩,失去了迈阿密的西裔铁票,使得民主党在势均力敌的总统大选中痛失江山。“关键的少数”在关键时刻扮演了关键角色。

1
HD中字
选票风波
主演:凯文·史派西,劳拉·邓恩,鲍勃·巴拉班,小艾德·博格里,约翰·赫特,丹尼斯·利瑞,布鲁斯·麦克吉尔,汤姆·威尔金森,布鲁斯·奥尔特曼
评论区
统计代码